Makerbot Replicator Print Quality

Recommended Posts

I sent a model of one of my projects the local Maketbot reseller to have a sample printed. My line of work is injection mould design and related product design (so mostly thin-wall stuff) so printing toy rockets and the like is not really a good test.

I received the sample earlier this evening was quite shocked to honest. Its nowhere near is good as I expected. Obviously I don't expect it to be of moulded quality but this was quite poor. I have uploaded a screenshot of the model and a photo of the printed part. Note the circled areas in the screenshot.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Well, then I'd say no, that's not what you'd expect. Provided there's nothing wrong with the source file. Those little "nubs" that are sticking out will need support and I'm guessing the guy/gal who printed that for you didn't bother. I would put in support manually for those in your CAD software for best result.

It also looks like there's some kind of geometry sandwiched in the lower part of the model? That'll get tricky to print.

Share on other sites

It is actually not clear whether in fact optimal settings were used for reproduction.

I also suspect that no one has made efforts to replicate this object as possible. There are simply too many factors to consider. Unfortunately, objects have to be adapted to the capabilities of a machine. I do not know any machine from MakerBot / Ultimaker / etc, which dissolves finely identical in all three dimensions.

It is not the first time that I see such patterns.

From basically good machines, terrible object pattern are sent. Perhaps the manufacturers simply lack trained personnel, an appropriate section, and or enough time.

I could put no conclusion from this result, which judges about the overall machine quality.

One conclusion I have, however: Some manufacturers believe it is sufficient to be able to build a good machine.

But it would be good to see how close our most experienced users come here to the original.

In parallel, I would like to see what the most experienced MakerBot users can do with their machines.

It is actually not clear whether in fact optimal settings were used for reproduction.

I also suspect that no one has made efforts to replicate this object as possible. There are simply too many factors to consider. Unfortunately, objects have to be adapted to the capabilities of a machine. I do not know any machine from MakerBot / Ultimaker / etc, which dissolves finely identical in all three dimensions.

It is not the first time that I see such patterns.

From basically good machines, terrible object pattern are sent. Perhaps the manufacturers simply lack trained personnel, an appropriate section, and or enough time.

I could put no conclusion from this result, which judges about the overall machine quality.

One conclusion I have, however: Some manufacturers believe it is sufficient to be able to build a good machine.

But it would be good to see how close our most experienced users come here to the original.

In parallel, I would like to see what the most experienced MakerBot users can do with their machines.

Markus

I tend to agree. I don't that the reseller was the best at 3D printing. He was very helpful. He knew what he was talking about. perhaps though the practical side lacked some experience.

I think the part was also printed way too fast. Seriously I'm not that interested in speed... quality comes first.

My gut tells me it can do much better but lack of experience and time constraints made for a shoddy print.

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

I sent a model of one of my projects the local Maketbot reseller to have a sample printed. My line of work is injection mould design and related product design (so mostly thin-wall stuff) so printing toy rockets and the like is not really a good test.

I received the sample earlier this evening was quite shocked to honest. Its nowhere near is good as I expected. Obviously I don't expect it to be of moulded quality but this was quite poor. I have uploaded a screenshot of the model and a photo of the printed part. Note the circled areas in the screenshot.

Is this result normal?

Normal, I don't know, but it is definitely not unseen to have prints of the detail level you are asking for come out something like that...

3D printing is NOT an "out of the box and everything will be dandy" kind of thing, and to print models like the one you have posted there in that sort of detail will require both experience and skill (the two go hand in hand really)...

Can it be printed better than shown in the picture? Definitely. Will it ever live up to your expectations...? Hard to say...

I'm wondering if you are maybe expecting a bit too much from the technology, a sort of "this could/will be the tool that will solve all my problems and headaches" approach...

In the end, its a machine that presses molten plastic through a 0.4 mm. hole that moves... There are limits to what it can do, and again, those limits are reached through a lot of tinkering...

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

Normal, I don't know, but it is definitely not unseen to have prints of the detail level you are asking for come out something like that...

3D printing is NOT an "out of the box and everything will be dandy" kind of thing, and to print models like the one you have posted there in that sort of detail will require both experience and skill (the two go hand in hand really)...

Can it be printed better than shown in the picture? Definitely. Will it ever live up to your expectations...? Hard to say...

I'm wondering if you are maybe expecting a bit too much from the technology, a sort of "this could/will be the tool that will solve all my problems and headaches" approach...

In the end, its a machine that presses molten plastic through a 0.4 mm. hole that moves... There are limits to what it can do, and again, those limits are reached through a lot of tinkering...

Share this post

Link to post

Share on other sites

There is definetly a lot that you can do to improve the quality of the piece you showed there.

First things first: If you upload your model (for example at youmagine.com), then we can tell you if there's something wrong with it.

For now: there's probably room for optimisation in the model. (There always is )

Then, it matters A LOT which settings you use to print. You can go fast, or high quality. Or anything in between. Some people achieve both at the same time - with a lot of tinkering and good experimenting. Everyone can achieve good quality just by printing slowly and doing a bit of tuning.

Next, it matters what filament you use. There are lots of good filaments, and there are even more bad filaments. You need a good quality filament to get a good quality print, period.

Then, you can modify your machine. The 0.4mm nozzle somewhat limits the resolution / surface quality of your prints. There are smaller diameter nozzles which can improve that. For the Ultimaker (Original) there are lots of hacks and mods that will increase your printing quality. The UM2 already is a good machine from stock - only little work is needed to achieve great results.

No doubt you can do better with a Replicator 2. Seems like your reseller wasn't very interested in delivering you a good sample.

It would be interesting to challenge both Replicator 2 and Ultimaker users to print a predefined model as good as they can and see who turns out winning

Picked By

Ultimaker Cura 4.0 is mainly focused on the improved user interface and cloud integration.
As always, we want to collect your user feedback for this release. If there are any improvements you can think of, feel free to mention it here and help us to shape the next release.